Thanks to the two Jocks in central government we can all look forward to the following......I sincerely hope that these two can sleep at night knowing that we have had our pants severly pulled down on this one.......

Road tax - Parker's

Thanks to the two Jocks in central government we can all look forward to the following......I sincerely hope that these two can sleep at night knowing that we have had our pants severly pulled down on this one.......

Road tax - Parker's

Serious question: what has the fact that they are, as you so eloquently put it, "Jocks" got to do with anything?

They are the 2 idiots who have defined such things as, for example, a Ford Focus 2.0l (non-turbo petrol) as a "gas-guzzler".

Shafted - MORE fecking Tax rises :thumbdwn:

But, the vRS is going to be costing about £50-ish a year less to tax than my 2.0 Cavalier...

I think I can live with my £5 increase. Feel sorry for you octavia owners

Serious question: what has the fact that they are, as you so eloquently put it, "Jocks" got to do with anything?

Tht's becuase they are.

Anyway, my point is the TAX, that's the real issue!

And, F.Y.I, i am half Scottish, my mother originates from Stornoway!

They are the 2 idiots who have defined such things as, for example, a Ford Focus 2.0l (non-turbo petrol) as a "gas-guzzler".

No.

It's lazy journalists who keep using the term "gas guzzler".

They are the 2 idiots who have defined such things as, for example, a Ford Focus 2.0l (non-turbo petrol) as a "gas-guzzler".

And then they forget that the Smaller Cars can be just as bad, if not worse than a larger engined car

Eg;

An '08 Focus 1.6 i had a few weeks back - on the motorway, at 70-75mph, the care was in 5th (top) gear, and sat just under 4k rpm - screaming along and returning about 28mpg

A 57 Mondeo 1.8 i had before that would sit at about 3k in 5th, and considering its also a heavier car, was returning about 32mpg

In standstill traffic, ie London, the Focus was marginally better than the Mondeo

I really do think that they forget about the rest of the Country outside of Fecking London at times :thumbdwn:

Serious question: what has the fact that they are, as you so eloquently put it, "Jocks" got to do with anything?

Don't you watch american teen-angst tv?

Alistair and Gordon have a new song, actually its an old one and its goes a little like this... ( to the tune of 'ere we go)

TAX AND SPEND!, TAX AND SPEND!, TAX AND SPEND!,

TAX AND SPEND!, TAX AND SPEND!, TAX AND SPEND!,

TAX AND SPEND!, TAX AND SPEND!, TAX AND SPEND!,

TAX AND SPEND!, TAX AND SPEND!, TAX AND SPEND!.

And no Dr Z, the answer is not different taxes, its less spending

Don't you watch american teen-angst tv?

Don't even know what you mean by that, my friend.

Anyway, I get more p!ssed of by the gutter press than I do with the government these days, and it's debatable which has more power....

Take this direct quote from the Torygraph:

"More than 9 million motorists face road tax increases of up to £245 under the Government's "green" car tax plans, the Treasury has admitted."

What it doesn't tell us is how many people face an increase of £245. What it also doesn't tell us is how many people stand to save money from the changes.

Now I'm not supporting the Government here, all I'm saying is that people should now be prepared to search for bare facts on their own as their morning newspaper will always have their own agenda.

Don't even know what you mean by that, my friend.

Anyway, I get more p!ssed of by the gutter press than I do with the government these days, and it's debatable which has more power....

Take this direct quote from the Torygraph:

"More than 9 million motorists face road tax increases of up to £245 under the Government's "green" car tax plans, the Treasury has admitted."

What it doesn't tell us is how many people face an increase of £245. What it also doesn't tell us is how many people stand to save money from the changes.

Now I'm not supporting the Government here, all I'm saying is that people should now be prepared to search for bare facts on their own as their morning newspaper will always have their own agenda.

Yes , quite a lot of those nine million will be seeing huge rises of at least five pounds!

On the radio this week there was some stupid cow complaining that because her car tax was going up by 80 quid she wouldn't be able to spend more money on the kids , buy more stuff , go on family days out , etc , etc , etc...

She was going to do all that with 80 quid?

Crikey

Don't even know what you mean by that, my friend.

Jock is also an American term for sporty, meat-head kids, who typically pick on the nerdy, intelligent types in american teen angst tv.

e.g. Stiffler (sp?) in the American Pie series of films.

On topic, I'm constantly digging out figures for whenever this subject comes up. I'm fed up of it now. I know it'll cost me £30 more when the change takes place - a 20% increase in tax.

I actually think that if they back down now it shows them to be the biggest bunch of pussies this side of the titty twister. They actually need to push this change through to maintain any shred of political respect.

Gordon Brown, more U-turns than a turn-in-the-road manouveres driving lesson. Catchy eh?

Yes , quite a lot of those nine million will be seeing huge rises of at least five pounds!

On the radio this week there was some stupid cow complaining that because her car tax was going up by 80 quid she wouldn't be able to spend more money on the kids , buy more stuff , go on family days out , etc , etc , etc...

She was going to do all that with 80 quid?

Crikey

Its called death by a thousand cuts

£80 on your car tax, council tax, groceries, petrol, mortgages it all adds up. Out of interest, when was tax freedom day this year?

found it: About Tax Freedom Day

Edited 11 July, 200817 yr by daiking
tfd info

Mine comes down.... 1.9tdi yet I do loads of miles

It really is a bit of a joke, but the facts have been available for a while, I'm just amazed its taken this long for the papers to rip into them.

Biggest joke was to remove the excemption for pre March 06 vehicles which people had bought in good faith were not going to get hit by the "4x4" banding. Now they do.

I'm all in favour of giving the whole damn lot of them a kicking. They'll know how my wallet feels like then.

Who's with me?

I'm all in favour of giving the whole damn lot of them a kicking. They'll know how my wallet feels like then.

Who's with me?

Babs for PM :thumbup:

I think I can live with my £5 increase. Feel sorry for you octavia owners

. Actually I'm paying the same this year as for my old Golf, which is on the flat rate. I'll pay £10 less next year and only another £5 the year after. So I'm saving money.

In each of those years I'll buy about 1,800 litres of fuel, which at the current rate of duty puts over a thousand pounds into Mr Darling's pocket, without considering VAT, which could easily double that over the next two years.

So for me road tax is less than 10% of my taxation.

I am confused by this idea that the new rates are not ecologically sound. They are based on CO2 emissions generated on a fairly conservative test based on real-world driving. That is as ecologically sound as you can get. It seems to me that almost all the arguments against these tax increases are based on mistaken assumptions; big cars are not necessarily gas guzzlers and small cars are not necessarily ecological. If these taxes put an end to the three-member households owning a seven-seat 4x4 MPV, used only to take junior half a mile to school and do the shopping, then that is a good thing. The only people I feel sorry for are the people living out in the country, for many of whom a heavy 4x4 is a necessity.

I am confused by this idea that the new rates are not ecologically sound. They are based on CO2 emissions generated on a fairly conservative test based on real-world driving. That is as ecologically sound as you can get. It seems to me that almost all the arguments against these tax increases are based on mistaken assumptions; big cars are not necessarily gas guzzlers and small cars are not necessarily ecological. If these taxes put an end to the three-member households owning a seven-seat 4x4 MPV, used only to take junior half a mile to school and do the shopping, then that is a good thing. The only people I feel sorry for are the people living out in the country, for many of whom a heavy 4x4 is a necessity.

I think the issue is that people on this - a motoring forum - are well versed in the arguments that are counter to what the government is telling us about "CO2" and "global warming" and are very angry that we - as motorists - are seen more and more as the scapegoat for everything

.

I am confused by this idea that the new rates are not ecologically sound. They are based on CO2 emissions

To counter that then simply they need to add it to the cost of fuel. Generally more polluting vehicles use more fuel.

Which is going to pollute more. A TVR used for 2000 miles per annum or a diesel mondeo doing 20,000 per annum. To simply charge an annual tax based on CO2 is fundamentally flawed, without taking into account mileage.

I am confused by this idea that the new rates are not ecologically sound. They are based on CO2 emissions generated on a fairly conservative test based on real-world driving. That is as ecologically sound as you can get. It seems to me that almost all the arguments against these tax increases are based on mistaken assumptions; big cars are not necessarily gas guzzlers and small cars are not necessarily ecological.

Then taxation should be directly proportionate to CO2 emissions? No?

That's not the case with the new duty levels as they can be disproportionately high for thirstier cars when compared to something in the middle bands.

The only truly fair way would be to scrap VED and add to fuel taxation so it's a charge on car *use* rather than ownership , and both economy and mileage affect how much you pay.

If these taxes put an end to the three-member households owning a seven-seat 4x4 MPV, used only to take junior half a mile to school and do the shopping, then that is a good thing.

But that would use a lot less fuel than me doing 28k a year in my octavia to 50+ mpg and they are expected to pay lots more for owning the car.

To counter that then simply they need to add it to the cost of fuel. Generally more polluting vehicles use more fuel.

Which is going to pollute more. A TVR used for 2000 miles per annum or a diesel mondeo doing 20,000 per annum. To simply charge an annual tax based on CO2 is fundamentally flawed, without taking into account mileage.

Exactly.

The VED changes are a classic bolshevik envy tax against nice and big cars. Funny that politicians don't have to pay tax on the cars that waft them around.

All pigs are equal but some are more equal than others.

The 1.6 FSI registered between 04 and Oct 06 goes up to 175 and in H.

Any built from Nov 2006 will be charged 150 and although only 10g/km less is in band G.

I've just seen figures suggesting that maybe 17% of vehicles will pay less, and 43% will pay more.

just checked mine and it reckons I should be paying £145 at the moment for a 2L TDi 05 reg, yet I have paid only £120 as per the 06 reg figure? SSSSSSSSSSSSH!!

Good points, well made, which is much better than anything I have heard in the media.

Unfortunately, while killing road tax may be sound, I don't think Gorden could bring himself to abolish a tax. More seriously, a massive increase in fuel tax at the moment would cause rioting in the streets.

There is also the problem of how you introduce it. If road tax were abolished tomorrow and fuel tax increased in line, then I have paid for six months road tax that I will pay again in fuel tax. The opposition and media would have a field day. The only way around that would be to delay the increase for twelve months, which would leave a big hole in Alistair's budget.

Another effect of the road tax increases is that they lead people to buy newer and less polluting cars. Whether it is ultimately better for the environment to spend the CO2 etc. to manufacture new cars or run old ones, would require a significant amount of research. It would almost certainly make the roads safer. Assuming that the government is well advised, (not a safe assumption, admittedly,) then to get that effect through what is, in most cases, a very minor tax increase is a good thing.

Most people change their cars after two to five years, and those with the higher rated cars will tend toward the shorter end of that range. It seems to me that most people that will be hit hardest will only need to pull their renewal schedule forward a year or maybe two, to avoid the 2010 increase. So long as the government stays on the same path, (who am I kidding, ) it should be possible to choose a reasonably cheap car in the vast majority of cases. For example the Octy vRS is horribly expensive in petrol, but only marginally more expensive in even 2.0 170 diesel, and you can save £200 a year by buying your Scout in diesel.

These increases have created fear in the general population. People will be asking what is going to happen after 2010. Are we going to see even steeper increases? Even if they can afford a top-end car now, will they be able to afford it then? Will the "ecological" band be squeezed tighter, so that what is ecological now, will be seen as a gas-guzzler in three years time? This makes people buy even less polluting cars than they need to, which cuts emissions two years ahead of tax increases and puts pressure on manufacturers to further cut emissions.